We're all familiar with the numbering of both the US and Interstate highway grid, but what about state highways? I'm sure this varies by state, but do any states follow a "grid" of their own? Do they number based on the order in which they were built? A lot of states seem to just number at random, based on atlases I've read.
Also, when building a 3-di, do states often go in numerical order? (i.e. your first even number 3-di would be 2xx, then 4xx, and so on).
New York doesn't follow a grid, but they do have some practices that they follow:
- A freeway extension of an Interstate spur is the same route number, but a state shield. For example, the extension of I-690 in Syracuse is NY 690.
- The x90 spurs increase from 190 to 890 west to east. The exception is I-990 in Buffalo.
- Reference routes (state maintained roads with a hidden number) are in the 900 series, with the second digit being the region number.
Here's a map with the DOT regions in NY:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fc%2Fce%2FNYSDOT_regions_map.svg%2F550px-NYSDOT_regions_map.svg.png&hash=925b77a7de63fffb0da490bf9c194a083460d4e2) (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NYSDOT_regions_map.svg)
Florida has a "grid" system that was created in 1941 (it replaced their former system) and implemented in 1946.
North and south roads end in odd numbers with the lowest number being on the east coast (Florida A1A for example) and the highest being on the western most section of Florida (namely Florida 99 - now Escambia County 99). East/West routes bear even numbers with the lowest number in the northern part of the state (Florida 2 for example) and the highest number in the south (Florida 90-a.k.a. US 41 for example). Even numbered routes that end in 0 (like Florida 20) typically run across the state and further split the grid system into segments.
See the example below for a more in depth explanation of the state grid system.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.southeastroads.com%2Fimages%2Ffl%2Ffl-state-routes-1946.jpg&hash=02cb2ece4a27f4013eb6d80d0ea65d33e3b5ffa7)
Click here (http://www.southeastroads.com/fl-sr.html) also.
And by the way, A1A is so named due to its close location to US 1, so as not to confuse the two routes.
Indiana and South Dakota are the only states that I know of that seem to try and number their state highways in a grid pattern using the same numbering rules as the US routes follow.
Washington runs on very strict system where two digit east-west state routes run south to north in two columns and two digit north-south run west to east in increasing intervals. Three digit routes use a branch numbering scheme, so routes off SR 27 are SR 27x. Routes off interstate 5 are SR 5xx, usually increasing south to north or west to east, routes off US-12 are 12x
Wyoming has no real scheme for long haul routes but numbers its local routes by county in alphabetical order, so Albany County has routes 10-14, Carbon County has routes 70-78, Goshen County has 151-161, Platte has 310-321, etc
Idaho theoretically clusters with 5x numbers up north, single digit numbers up north, 7x numbers down south, 8x numbers in the southeast, etc, but it is very loosely adhered to
California...has nothing.
Delaware east-west routes mainly increase as one heads south (Delaware 4 was once an east-west route between Middletown and Odessa, but its relocation is still below Delaware 2.), the north-south routes loosely do the same from east to west (Delaware 1 was added over Delaware 14 later, Delaware 9 originally ended south of Odessa, so it was never east of Delaware 7 until it was extended).
Delaware imports several numbers from Pennsylvania and Maryland. They even imported New Jersey 48 when the two were connected via ferry.
With all that stated, the state got a kick with x2's: 42, 62, 72, and 92, which I've never really understood why. Delaware 71 is an import remnant from Maryland 71. Delaware 23 was the most recently added two-digit route. I don't know how Delaware 44 got its number.
Maryland uses a route-clustering system based upon the county. Mike Pruett has a good description of it here (http://www.mdroads.com/routes/md.html).
Quote from: voyager on February 10, 2009, 01:08:58 AM
California...has nothing.
Yes... but sort of in the same realm, when California adds a new state route, they use the lowest number available. When a number is decommissioned, its thrown into the pot for future use. So California 7 is on its 3rd version, and California 11 is supposed to come back yet again too.
Hmm, I never knew that.
All I know at the moment about Tennessee is that they cluster their secondary route numbers. [see my post in the Numeric Highway Game for TN 246-248. Other TN secondaries from 240-25x are in the middle TN area south of Nashville.
I'm not saying there isn't a pattern for the primary state routes, but I don't know what it might be.
California did at least start with a system. Initially, it had a "some for you and some for me" system, whereby consecutive numbers or groups of numbers were split between Northern and Southern California (e.g. CA 2 in SoCal, CA 3 through 5 in NoCal [CA 5 is now CA 35, I think], CA 7 in SoCal, etc.). But now, yes, it's pretty random.
Connecticut originally numbered major routes in the 100s and minor routes in the 300s. This system was long ago scrapped. Now, state routes are numbered from 1-399 (but the same number as a US route or Interstate present in the state is never used) and unsigned state-maintained segments of road are numbered from 400-999, with 400's used for routes leading to state facilities, 500's, 600's, 700's, and 800's used for other routes in each of the four transportation districts of the state, and 900's used for miscellaneous little odds and ends.
And, actually, many state route numbers east of the Hudson inherit their numbers from an old, pre-US highway system attempt on the part of states up there to come up with a system of highways for New England. Different from current standard practice, they made even numbers north-south and odd numbers east-west. Then the US highways system showed up and they scrapped the whole thing, with some of the routes getting absorbed into US routes and others becoming just state routes. But this is, for instance, where the numbers for NY 22, CT/MA/VT 8, CT/MA/NH 10, CT/MA/NH/VT 12, CT/MA/NH 32, VT/NH 9 (and NY 7, they changed their number), and explains why those routes are so long and continue their numbers across (sometimes multiple) state lines.
In theory the numbers 1-99 were reserved for this (hence the state routes in the 100's and 300's thing).
QuoteYes... but sort of in the same realm, when California adds a new state route, they use the lowest number available. When a number is decommissioned, its thrown into the pot for future use. So California 7 is on its 3rd version, and California 11 is supposed to come back yet again too.
I think Wisconsin does something similar, as WI-15 is in its 3rd or 4th version (at one point it was what's now I-43 between Milwaukee and Beloit)
Quote from: DrZoidberg on February 10, 2009, 10:20:07 AM
QuoteYes... but sort of in the same realm, when California adds a new state route, they use the lowest number available. When a number is decommissioned, its thrown into the pot for future use. So California 7 is on its 3rd version, and California 11 is supposed to come back yet again too.
I think Wisconsin does something similar, as WI-15 is in its 3rd or 4th version (at one point it was what's now I-43 between Milwaukee and Beloit)
Not sure about that with Wisconsin, but I do know they don't use single digit route numbers. WI has a rule of not duplicating routes - a rule that was violated twice already:
- I-39 with a WIS 39 already signed (albiet in two totally unrelated locations)
- WIS 794 (Milw Lake Parkway) as an "extension" of the already existing I-794
Of course there will probably be another violation once I-41 is implemented (if it is)
When I lived in Wisconsin, the type of "system" I saw was all the primary highways were numbered 11-99, and then "lesser" or small spur highways were between 100-199. There were exceptions, but I don't recall too many highways north of 200 (241, 341, 441, and 794).
Quote from: DrZoidberg on February 10, 2009, 11:46:42 AM
When I lived in Wisconsin, the type of "system" I saw was all the primary highways were numbered 11-99, and then "lesser" or small spur highways were between 100-199. There were exceptions, but I don't recall too many highways north of 200 (241, 341, 441, and 794).
Yeah that make sense.
It seems the ones of 200 and above are sort of spur routes
- 241, 341, 441 off US 41
- 213 off WIS 13 (signed when WIS 13 was extended all the way to Beloit(?) - course WIS 13 now ends in the Dells :crazy:
- 312 (Eau Claire North Crossing) off US 12
- 253 (Spooner) off US 53
- 351 (Janesville) replaced by WIS 11 off US 51
- 794 - self explanitory
I'm not sure what Pennsylvania does as a state, but there seem to be a few 3-digit state routes (3ds?) that are "children" of a 2-digit route, whether state or U.S. In my area are SR 213, 413 and 513 in the vicinity of U.S. 13; and SR 132, 232, 332, and 532 that are near to SR 32.
We have our share of state routes that fit in the interstate grid, such as 581, 283 (though there is an I-283), 378 (from a former routing of I-78).
We also have a number of state routes that were old U.S. routes of the same number, such as 611, 309, 230.
When the Great Renumbering occurred in 1964, California's seemed to start to use as many numbers (sequentially) as possible for a while, the best example being these former portions of Route 9: Route 236 in the Santa Cruz mountains, Route 237 in the South Bay, and Route 238 in the East Bay. There's also a sense of regional clustering, as was in the original system (i.e. 84 and 85 are in the Bay Area, as are 35 and 37, and 92 and unbuilt 93; 38 and 39 are both in the metro Los Angeles environs).
Route 330, 371, and 242 all are based off of former designations (30, 71, and 24 respectively).
The Foothill toll roads in Orange County had their own system (231, 261, 241, of which 231 no longer exists)
The state looks like it tries to avoid numbers 300 and above as much as possible. It also only generally follows even-odd rules; Route 14 (an even number) is north-south, replacing old US 6's westernmost extent (an east-west route running north south). Route 91 is east-west because it was one of the southernmost segments of US 91 at one time. Not sure why 82 and 72 were chosen for old segments of US 101.
Originally, higher numbers were preferred for the rural counties, still evidenced with some long-standing east-west route numbers in the Central Valley (152, 180, 166, 120) and with some post-1964 routes there too (137, 155, 201, 219 - all of which do not follow the even/odd rule at all).
Yeah, I guess you're right about that...29 is also in the bay area, and didn't 121 used to be based off of 21 before 680 replaced it? Also, many of the lower numbers are in the bay area, most of the numbers between 4-87 are mostly scattered around there.
Quote from: voyager on February 10, 2009, 03:16:50 PM
Yeah, I guess you're right about that...29 is also in the bay area, and didn't 121 used to be based off of 21 before 680 replaced it? Also, many of the lower numbers are in the bay area, most of the numbers between 4-87 are mostly scattered around there.
121 is old 37 actually (37 has the odd # for east-west probably because the western segment used to be part of a north-south route).
Bay Area #s under 100: 4, 9, 12, 13, 17, (21), 24, 25 (kinda), 29, 35, 37, 61, [77], 82, 84, 85, 87, 92, [93]
Yep, 37 used to go to Napa and 48 used to take the current route.
Quote from: voyager on February 10, 2009, 03:35:59 PM
Yep, 37 used to go to Napa and 48 used to take the current route.
That reminds me, of the numbers listed in my Bay Area route rundown above, 13, 25 (I think), 35, 61, 77, 82, 85, 87, 92, and 93 were all assigned after 1964, lending credence to your idea that lower numbers are more common there.
Another place where route clustering is still common would be San Diego County, with routes 52 and 54 being both post-1964 creations as well IIRC. But that only extends so far - numbers added after the 1964 renumbering include 163 (added in 1969), 274, 117 (now 905), and the unbuilt trio of 157, 171, and 252.
Here in VA I can't for the life of me either determine a numbering system myself or find one on a website...
But it does seem that routes are clustered in certain areas (i.e. 134, 143, 152, fmr. 167, 169) all here on the Peninsula, but then you throw in oddities like 278 (runs parallel between 167 and 169) and 351 (runs parallel to 143 and then to 169), which I assume were added at a later date. And it doesn't seem like VA follows the N/S- odd, E/W- even scheme either... VA-351 is entirely almost due east-west. However, VA does number extensions of interstates with the same number (VA-164, 1-95, etc.).
As for my other "focus states"...
Minnesota: Minnesota's route numbering had its original basis in the 1920 Constitutional Routes and the first crop of Legislative Routes in 1933. Since then, due to truncations, extensions, and whatnot, Minnesota's route numbering has pretty much become arbitrary. Steve Riner does a pretty good job of delineating the routes (and their Constitutional/Legislative Route numbers) on his Minnesota Highways (http://www.steve-riner.com/mnhighways/mnhome.htm) site.
Mississippi: Though additions and truncations can be a lengthy and Legislatively-involved process, Mississippi actually has a method behind its route numbering. First off, all even numbered routes are signed east-west, with odd-numbered routes signed north-south. This holds true even if the route in question is lined up in a different directional fashion (for example, MS 315 is more or less east-west and "North MS 315" even dips southward at one point).
Second, 1 and 2 digit routes generally increase in number from north to south and from west to east, plus there are three waves of such for both even and odd. For example, MS 1 is in western Mississppi, increasing to MS 25 in eastern Mississippi. Then the process begins again with MS 27 in the west and up to MS 39 in the east. Then there's 41-63 in a generally north-to-south fashion. For the even routes: 1-26, 30-44, then 46. There are no MS 34, 36, 38, or 40 (presumably "reserved"). MS 50 is a post-Interstate renumbering of original MS 10. Likewise, MS 28 is a post-Interstate renumbering of original MS 20. MS 48 appears to be an outlier here.
Mississippi's 3 digit routes also follow mostly a clustering pattern with a couple exceptions. MS 1xx routes are old US xx alignments that MDOT wishes to keep on the highway system....e.g. MS 145, MS 172, MS 198. On a similar fashion, MS 245 (the only 2xx route) follows an old ALT US 45 alignment.
The remainder of the 3-digit routes are clustered. 3xx routes are in northern Mississippi, 4xx routes in central Mississippi, 5xx routes in southern Mississippi, and 6xx routes along the Mississippi Gulf Coast. Likewise, Mississippi's "hidden routes" are also clustered: 7xx up north, 8xx in central MS, and 9xx down south.
Alabama: I've not yet looked deep to see if there's a set pattern to Alabama's routes. Earlier initial looks suggest there's no set pattern. That said, there are four items of note. First, like Mississippi, even-numbered routes are signed east-west and odd-numbered routes signed north-south. Second, except for AL 759 (which is an extension of I-759), there are no numbers higher than 299, and no even numbers higher than 248.
Third, all U.S. routes have an underlying state route (for example, AL 7 underneath US 11), though like Tennessee these are not signed. However, they are mileposted. So if you see mileposts along a US route in Alabama, the mileposts are for the underlying state route and NOT for the US route (hence why US 45 has 2 sets of mileposts).
Lastly, Alabama has no qualms with keeping state highway numbers that coincide with its Interstate numbers. So AL 10, AL 20, AL 59, AL 65...they all exist...even AL 165.
Quote from: akotchi on February 10, 2009, 01:10:53 PM
I'm not sure what Pennsylvania does as a state, but there seem to be a few 3-digit state routes (3ds?) that are "children" of a 2-digit route, whether state or U.S. In my area are SR 213, 413 and 513 in the vicinity of U.S. 13; and SR 132, 232, 332, and 532 that are near to SR 32.
We have our share of state routes that fit in the interstate grid, such as 581, 283 (though there is an I-283), 378 (from a former routing of I-78).
We also have a number of state routes that were old U.S. routes of the same number, such as 611, 309, 230.
Up in Mercer County you have PA-358 branching off of PA-58, as well, in Greenville.
I'm pretty sure the state tries to keep certain groups of numbers to certain areas. But, I can't remember the exact pattern (which has long since been obfuscated.
Sykotyk
Oregon's is kind of weird, because the state has internal "highway" numbers and external "route" numbers, and the two, in many instances, don't match. For instance, internal "Highway 144" is OR-217, and parts of OR-8 and OR-47 make up internal "Highway 29".
The actual posted route numbers, at least the established ones, seem to follow some sort of loose grid. The north-south "primary" ones (1 and 2 digit) progress in odd numbers, generally increasing from east to west. OR-3, the lowest is in far northeastern Oregon, and the highest one, OR-53, is near the Oregon coast. (It is also worth noting that US 197 was at one point OR-23.)
The east-west primary ones use even numbers and tend to progress in four "strips". The first strip with the lowest numbers (OR-6 being the current lowest) are in western Oregon, increasing heading south (down to OR-46), then there's a strip for central Oregon, which is actually largely unused--the only ones currently are OR-66 and OR-70. (US-26 over Mt. Hood was formerly OR-50, OR-216 was once OR-52 and part of US-20 was OR-54.) Then there's two strips in the eastern part of the state, one finishing out the 70s, with OR-74 and OR-78, and then, farther east, OR-82 and OR-86.
There are a few aberrations in there as well. OR-37 is in eastern Oregon, the current OR-52 is designed to be a continuation of ID-52 (it was once signed as OR-90, which makes more sense). There's also a couple that retained the number of decommissioned US highways--OR-99, 99W, 99E, and OR-126. OR-138 and OR-140 are also kind of oddities, but I presume they have their numbers because they are near OR-38 and a hypothetical OR-40 (if there ever was one), but extend far enough that they cross several strips. (Both are in excess of 100 miles, making them the two longest state routes.)
The old "secondary" routes use 3-digit numbers beginning with "2". The dichotomy of those is a little looser, and I'm not entirely sure how it works. There are some spots that make sense (OR-211, 213, 217 and 219), and others that don't (OR-237 way out in Eastern Oregon). They follow the standard odd=N/S and even=E/W directionality, though.
And in 2002, the legislature passed a bill calling for the signing of the remaining ODOT internal highways that didn't already have route numbers--the system on many (but not all) of those uses a two-digit "county code" for the first two digits, except in the instances in which the number conflicts with an already-posted route, in which case they make the first digit "5". Annoyingly, those don't follow the standard odd/even system, though, as OR-131 is east-west primarily.
-Alex (Tarkus)
Quote from: akotchi on February 10, 2009, 01:10:53 PM
I'm not sure what Pennsylvania does as a state, but there seem to be a few 3-digit state routes (3ds?) that are "children" of a 2-digit route, whether state or U.S. In my area are SR 213, 413 and 513 in the vicinity of U.S. 13; and SR 132, 232, 332, and 532 that are near to SR 32.
Pennsylvania originally clustered routes, but after years of decommissioning and renumbering, it is barely noticeable except for those examples and the x46s up near Bradford.
Quote from: akotchi on February 10, 2009, 01:10:53 PMWe have our share of state routes that fit in the interstate grid, such as 581, 283 (though there is an I-283), 378 (from a former routing of I-78).
PA 283 is actually SR 0300. No idea why it wasn't just signed that way other than to keep some consistency with I-283 much like New York has their I-481/NY 481, I-690/NY 690, etc. pairs.
Quote from: froggie on February 10, 2009, 06:37:26 PM
QuoteHere in VA I can't for the life of me either determine a numbering system myself or find one on a website...
Did you try our VHP page (http://www.vahighways.com/history.htm) on the subject? :nod:
VA 164 has no relation whatsoever to I-64 or any I-x64s, though it theoretically could become an I-164 in the future. It's simply a continuation of earlier numbering policy...there's been a VA 164 of some sort in the Hampton Roads area since 1933.
No I did not... keep forgetting that site exists. I've bookmarked it now. :D
And seriously? I heard when they built the Western Freeway (VA-164) it was slated to become I-164. But another example that can be used instead is 895 or 195 in Richmond. 195 I know is a continuation of I-195.
Arkansas seems to just slap a number on most highways, except AR 471, AR 463, AR 365, AR 367 and a few others, but these are old alignments of US Routes. Otherwise, it seems haphazard. At one time, there might have been a logical system, but there doesn't seem to be one now.
3di's, you have 540 which was the first 3di, 430, 630, 530 and 440. Since Memphis has I-240, maybe Arkansas decided not to use that number.
Louisiana's current state highways 1 to 1241 date to 1955. They were all designated in one bill (Act 40 of the 1955 La. Legislature Extraordinary Session). Higher numbers (with the exception of 191, designated 1980) were created later.
A basic separation is that between the primary "class A" and secondary "class B" (1-185) and the farm to market "class C" roads as they were defined in 1955 (300-1241). (This A-B-C system to legally classify roads is no longer used by the state; La. switched to the standard road function classification system ca. 1979.) Though parts or all of some roads within the 1-185 range were classified as C roads, all roads 300 and up were defined as farm to market. I presume that the missing range of numbers (notably any numbers in the 2xx range) which was left unused between where the A and B class designations end and the C road designations pick up was for potential use as a future expansion area for primary and secondary designations.
Though there seems to be no pattern to the numbering of highways, upon careful observation some numbering patterns are observable. The first 25 SRs are all generally long roads and were numbered on a grid system (roughly speaking, one for the western part of the state and another for the southeast), with evens E-W and odds N-S (this is obvious if you look at the single digit SRs). Above that, the primary tendency is clustering, especially apparent in the Class C routes (SRs 300-1241) and even more so as you go up the sequence. For instance, the LA 7x routes are located largely in the region south and west of Baton Rouge, the 13x routes are in northeast La., and in St. Tammany Parish routes a cluster of 108x routes are located within a few miles of each other. A few outliers exist to the pattern such as LA 72 and LA 141, which are located far from the "zone" where one would expect them to be.
As routes were added from 1955 onward, the state apparently picked a random number (3000) and worked sequentially from there. This would explain why we have major highways and even freeways with high route designations that are unheard of elsewhere in America, or where they do exist are usually assigned to very minor roads.
Around 2000, the state began to supplement 3xxx routes with 12xx routes starting from 1242 (picking up directly after the last number used in the 1955 sequence), and it would appear that the newest state routes are actually being numbered in this range. I guess the state was reticient to crack the 3300 barrier. :-o
The hyphenated routes are interesting, and they get their own explanation contained herein:
http://urbanprairiewasteland.blogspot.com/2008/05/facts-about-louisianas-highway-system.html (http://urbanprairiewasteland.blogspot.com/2008/05/facts-about-louisianas-highway-system.html)
Wisconsin always seemed to have a method to the madness of their county highways. Generally, the county would have a couple of "primary" county routes (ex. "J) several "secondary" county highways (ex. "JJ" or "JF") and even a few 3dis :spin: (I think there is a county VVV near Lambeau Field)
Quote from: DrZoidberg on February 10, 2009, 11:18:59 PM
Wisconsin always seemed to have a method to the madness of their county highways. Generally, the county would have a couple of "primary" county routes (ex. "J) several "secondary" county highways (ex. "JJ" or "JF") and even a few 3dis :spin: (I think there is a county VVV near Lambeau Field)
Have you ever found any county sign multiplexes that spell words?
I recall reading that at one time Ohio used some form of a cluster pattern in their original signages....here is the source
http://pages.prodigy.net/john.simpson/highways/expls.html (http://pages.prodigy.net/john.simpson/highways/expls.html)
Growing up in Indiana, I am used to a grid system for the state routes, which reflects the same grid as the U.S. Highway system, with SR 2 in the north, SR 1 in the east, SR 66 in the south and SR 71 in the west. But, like the regular U.S. and Interstate system, there are some highways that don't fit the grid correctly, though the system still is pretty useful.
Nevada's current state route numbering system has routes in a former road classification scheme which was completely renumbered in 1976. The road classifications were not limited to state owned; several locally-maintained city streets and rural highways were assigned numbers in this system. The designations were based on the road type and where primary funding sources came from:
- Federal Aid Primary (FAP)/Federal Aid Interstate (FAI): U.S. Highways and Interstates, numbered to match the U.S Route or Interstate Route number
- Federal Aid Secondary (FAS): roads of regional importance, numbered 100-499
- Federal Aid Urban (FAU): roads of importance in designated urban or small-urban areas, numbered 500-699
- State Aid Routes (SAR): secondary roads of regional importance, numbered 700-899
The numbering of routes were clustered by county or urban area, with number blocks progressing through the county or city names alphabetically and leaving room for expansion. Thus, Carson City (an independent county) had FAS's in the low 100s and SAR's in the low 700's, while White Pine County had FAS's in the high 400's and SAR's in the high 800s. The situation was similar with cities, Boulder City starting at FAU 500, Las Vegas having FAU's in the mid-high 500s & low 600s, and Reno-Sparks having FAU routes in the mid-high 600s. In most instances, the numbers were assigned as one progressed throughout the county or the city (south to north, east to west, etc.--it wasn't consistent, except that the Las Vegas FAU routes were mostly assigned in a grid pattern).
If a road were a state maintained facility, it would be assigned a state route number matching its FAS/FAU/SAR designation. The problem with this system is that a road's classification could change, and NDOT highway logs from the 1980's indicate this. For example, Rainbow Boulevard in Las Vegas was assigned to both FAS 153 and FAU 595. As a state maintained roadway, the state route designation of Rainbow was listed in those log books as SR 153. However, as the Las Vegas area grew in the 80's, more of the road became urban and mileage was transferred to FAU 595.
I'm not sure exactly what happened, but it would seem that this system grew too cumbersome to keep up with. By 1991, the state abandoned the Federal/State Aid system of routes, or at least no longer shows these in their official state highway logs. Any NDOT-maintained roadway after this time kept the Federal Aid or State Aid number it had been assigned previously as its State Route number, with some exceptions (Rainbow Blvd became SR 595).
With the abandonment of this system, I'm not sure how new state route numbers are assigned--there have been two new routes added to the system since then (that I know of), and they both fit withing the previous number system. One route (SR 146) in Henderson was partially reassigned (to SR 546), but the new number was probably its old FAU number.
I did not see NJ's numbering system explained here. It's simpler than it looks. 1-10 are in the northeast part of the state, 10-20 have intermixed but are just outside that range, then 20-30, 30-40, 40-50, 50-60. US 9W was originally NJ 1 and NJ 17/NJ 94 were originally NJ 2/8 (renumbered to match NY). US 46 was originally NJ 6. Suddenly, with the locations of 3, 4, 5, and 7, the pattern emerges. 9 and 11 were local roads in the Newark area. Now, the 1's are a little tricky because a lot of them came in randomly. But you do see 19-20-21 next to each other, and 22 was renumbered to NJ 59, and US 1 north of New Brunswick used to be 25... Quite simply, the reason it looks like almost no pattern now is because the US highway system broke it up.
Quote from: akotchi on February 10, 2009, 01:10:53 PM
I'm not sure what Pennsylvania does as a state, but there seem to be a few 3-digit state routes (3ds?) that are "children" of a 2-digit route, whether state or U.S. In my area are SR 213, 413 and 513 in the vicinity of U.S. 13; and SR 132, 232, 332, and 532 that are near to SR 32.
We have our share of state routes that fit in the interstate grid, such as 581, 283 (though there is an I-283), 378 (from a former routing of I-78).
We also have a number of state routes that were old U.S. routes of the same number, such as 611, 309, 230.
Here's a nice site regarding numbering of state routes in PA:
http://www.m-plex.com/roads/numbering.html (http://www.m-plex.com/roads/numbering.html)
In the Detroit area, the 3 big routes starting in downtown detroit were given the first 3 odd digits. Woodward became M-1, Gratiot and Fort Street for a while are M-3, and Grand River was given M-5. There are no other single-digit state routes except for those three.
Quote from: Hellfighter06 on March 11, 2009, 07:02:36 PM
In the Detroit area, the 3 big routes starting in downtown detroit were given the first 3 odd digits. Woodward became M-1, Gratiot and Fort Street for a while are M-3, and Grand River was given M-5. There are no other single-digit state routes except for those three.
Don't forget the Davison Freeway (M-8).
New Mexico, since it renumbered a significant portion of its route in 1988, has a system where all routes designated since that time are three-digit, with the first digit being the NMDOT District (1-6). Since not all routes were redesignated, however, there are a lot of one- and two-digit routes remaining, and a lot of three-digit routes that don't follow the first digit=DOT district rule. Another wrinkle is that, since 1988, there are no state route concurrencies with other routes. Thus, a short jog along another numbered road prevents a state route from being continuous.
I'd renumber British Columbia to once again match Washington.
This is not an opinion thread, its a thread about the origins or systems of each state's highway numbering system.
AZ uses a 2 digit primary, 3 digit secondary system
Eg.
87-187 287 387 487 (never posted) 587
77 177 277 377
Sometimes 3 digits are left over from historical highways:
266, 366 (from former US 666), now US 191
181 (from 81, then US 666, now US 191)
186 (from when AZ 86 went along I-10)
189, 289 - when US 89 still ran to the Mexican border
179 from when AZ 89A was AZ 79, then US 89A
These 3 digit routes do not correspond:
143, (153), 238 (yes, AZ does have a hwy 238), 347, (504, now US 64, continuing NM 504)
Quote from: Hellfighter on March 11, 2009, 07:02:36 PM
In the Detroit area, the 3 big routes starting in downtown detroit were given the first 3 odd digits. Woodward became M-1, Gratiot and Fort Street for a while are M-3, and Grand River was given M-5. There are no other single-digit state routes except for those three.
Don't forget M-6 near Grand Rapids and M-8. Actually, as I understand it, Michigan "reserved" the single-digits for a superhighway system that later became the Interstates, and they started to re-assign the single-digits later. All of the numbers less than 10 have been in use at some time except M-2. M-7 became M-86, M-9 became M-99. M-4 was once M-134 in the UP, and later the Northwest Highway section of M-10. M-5 and M-6 were once assigned in the UP as well.
Hawaii's route numbering system has been discussed in a separate thread -- based on the Federal Aid route number system established in the "Great Renumbering" of the mid-1950s, with clustering by island, combined with "parent-daughter" numbering of two-digit primary routes and related three-digit secondary routes, and some four-digit secondary routes with more random number assignments but still clustered by island.
Alaska's twelve routes don't seem to follow much of a pattern (other than being completely out of synch with its Federal Aid route numbers), except that route 1 serves the largest city Anchorage, route 2 serves the second-largest city Fairbanks, route 3 connects Anchorage and Fairbanks, and the two newest routes (11 and 98) got the highest numbers, with the out-of-sequence 98 following the trail used by miners in the Klondike gold rush of 1898.
Both of the new states got basically "clean sheet of paper" systems, not constrained by any existing Interstate or US routes (but Hawaii left one-digit routes unassigned initially, making room for the Interstates that came later).
Quote from: oscar on April 27, 2010, 04:13:03 AM
Hawaii's route numbering system has been discussed in a separate thread -- based on the Federal Aid route number system established in the "Great Renumbering" of the mid-1950s, with clustering by island, combined with "parent-daughter" numbering of two-digit primary routes and related three-digit secondary routes, and some four-digit secondary routes with more random number assignments but still clustered by island.
Alaska's twelve routes don't seem to follow much of a pattern (other than being completely out of synch with its Federal Aid route numbers), except that route 1 serves the largest city Anchorage, route 2 serves the second-largest city Fairbanks, route 3 connects Anchorage and Fairbanks, and the two newest routes (11 and 98) got the highest numbers, with the out-of-sequence 98 following the trail used by miners in the Klondike gold rush of 1898.
Both of the new states got basically "clean sheet of paper" systems, not constrained by any existing Interstate or US routes (but Hawaii left one-digit routes unassigned initially, making room for the Interstates that came later).
Then and again Oscar, how are 2-digit routes assigned in Hawaii? :colorful:
Quote from: ausinterkid on April 27, 2010, 08:02:10 AM
Quote from: oscar on April 27, 2010, 04:13:03 AM
Hawaii's route numbering system has been discussed in a separate thread -- based on the Federal Aid route number system established in the "Great Renumbering" of the mid-1950s, with clustering by island, combined with "parent-daughter" numbering of two-digit primary routes and related three-digit secondary routes, and some four-digit secondary routes with more random number assignments but still clustered by island.
Then and again Oscar, how are 2-digit routes assigned in Hawaii? :colorful:
Beats me. The guy who assigned most of the original numbers 55 or so years ago is probably long dead, and I was lucky to find (deep in the recesses of the National Archives) what information I did on the numbering system's origins.
Since Hawaiians generally don't give a crap about route numbers anyway, so long as each state route has a number for administrative purposes, that's good enough (except the primary/secondary number distinction is a useful signal to motorists about what kind of road quality to expect). Anything more is just overthinking the exercise.
Quote from: ausinterkid on April 27, 2010, 02:14:05 AM
AZ uses a 2 digit primary, 3 digit secondary system
Eg.
87-187 287 387 487 (never posted) 587
77 177 277 377
Sometimes 3 digits are left over from historical highways:
266, 366 (from former US 666), now US 191
181 (from 81, then US 666, now US 191)
186 (from when AZ 86 went along I-10)
189, 289 - when US 89 still ran to the Mexican border
179 from when AZ 89A was AZ 79, then US 89A
These 3 digit routes do not correspond:
143, (153), 238 (yes, AZ does have a hwy 238), 347, (504, now US 64, continuing NM 504)
Don't forget AZ-389!! While it doesn't connect to US-89 anymore (just US-89A), it does fit in with the AZ format.
As for Utah, there is no grid, but route numbers are often clustered together, like:
UT-7, UT-8, and UT-9 (all of which have a portion at least somewhere near St. George)
UT-12, UT-14, UT-17, UT-18, all of which are in SW portion of the state. You also had UT-11 (now US-89A), UT-13 (replaced by 20 westernmost miles of I-70), UT-15 (now UT-9), and UT-19 (from Cedar City NW to Lund). The still-existing routes are relics of a plan that initially put teen-numbered routes in the SW portion of the state.
UT-118, UT-119, UT-120, all in the Richfield area.
UT-67 (Legacy Parkway) and UT-68 (Redwood Rd.), in Salt Lake and Davis Counties
UT-43, UT-44, and UT-45, all in NE part of state (near Flaming Gorge/Vernal areas)
UT-32, UT-35, and UT-39, on the back end of the Wasatch Mountians
UT-20, UT-21, UT-22, UT-24, UT-25, UT-28, and UT-29, all roughly in mid-southern part of state
UT-87 and UT-88, in NE part of state (around Vernal)
UT-261 and UT-262, in SE part of state (UT-263 was another, being the eastern leg of UT-276)
That's about all I can think about right now.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on February 10, 2009, 09:05:40 PM
And seriously? I heard when they built the Western Freeway (VA-164) it was slated to become I-164. But another example that can be used instead is 895 or 195 in Richmond. 195 I know is a continuation of I-195.
The number appears to have been a coincidence, as froggie said.
VA 895 was numbered as such because the way it was planned and funded meant it could not become an interstate highway, at least for as long as it remains a toll road. Presumably if tolls are ever removed, it could become I-895, but Transurban has a 99-year lease on the highway, so assuming it doesn't lose that lease somehow, we'll be into the 2100s before I-895 becomes reality in Virginia.
VA 195 was numbered as an extension of I-195 and is maintained by the Richmond Metropolitan Authority (which now signs the beginning and end of its area of maintenance - it does this with VA 76, too).
VA 785 is a placeholder for I-785, should it ever come into being in Virginia. It isn't signed, although "Future I-785" is.
According to the VHP, back when dinosaurs ruled the earth, three-digit state highways in Virginia were usually spurs of two-digit routes (sometimes one-digit routes, which caused confusion), and seem to have been numbered in the order of their creation - the first spur of VA 30 was VA 301, the second was VA 302, etc. This could extend past 10 - the 10th spur of VA 10 was VA 1010, and there were also a VA 1011 and a VA 1012. A spur of a spur (the first VA 311, which is now part of VA 54) got numbered as VA 3111, one of the highest numbered primary routes ever to exist.
The only current rule seems to be that primary/U.S./interstate routes cannot duplicate secondary route numbers, even though this probably isn't even a rule at all - it's just hard for this to happen since the SR's start at 600. There is no SR 895 in Chesterfield County (Henrico has no SR's). There was not a SR 664 in Suffolk when Suffolk still officially had SR's, but there IS a SR 785 in Pittsylvania County, though I'm not sure VA 785 enters the county.
Excellent site regarding PA route numbering:
http://www.m-plex.com/roads/numbering.html
NEW MEXICO has no coherence to its numbering system for highways. They don't duplicate federal or Interstate numbers, but for some unknown reason, once a number is retired, it is forever. There is no rhyme or reason, but if a highway route number is replaced, it is always with some long three digit number that has no reference to a parent highway. Along state route numbers such as SR 18, which used to be the longest state highway was replaced in 1988 by three different state highway route numbers that were not related . They keep the original number from its southern or western point of origin.
New Mexico looks like they eliminated all multiplexes in their state highway system, which is how 18 ended up with several numbers (as did a lot of other formerly trans-state routes, like 3).
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 29, 2010, 12:17:39 AM
New Mexico looks like they eliminated all multiplexes in their state highway system, which is how 18 ended up with several numbers (as did a lot of other formerly trans-state routes, like 3).
Hmm.. What California tried to do in 1964, but yet we still have multiplexes!
Quote from: ausinterkid on April 29, 2010, 03:27:11 AM
Hmm.. What California tried to do in 1964, but yet we still have multiplexes!
Not officially, you don't.
Case in point: The Golden Gate Bridge officially has no routes on it; US 101 and CA 1 are signed across it for motorist convenience.
Quote from: Bickendan on April 29, 2010, 04:20:31 AM
Case in point: The Golden Gate Bridge officially has no routes on it; US 101 and CA 1 are signed across it for motorist convenience.
I didn't know that. So, officially, US 101 and CA 1 have a gap in them?
Quote from: sandiaman on April 28, 2010, 11:47:20 PMNEW MEXICO has no coherence to its numbering system for highways.
There is a logic to it, actually, but you need to have a copy of the 1912 state highway map in order to see the underlying pattern, which was severely disrupted by the US highways and by the 1988 renumbering.
QuoteThey don't duplicate federal or Interstate numbers, but for some unknown reason, once a number is retired, it is forever.
This is not always true--NM 1 is such a "revived" number. I think the main reason numbers are not recycled is to allow similar "revivals" within the same general corridor as the original number.
QuoteThere is no rhyme or reason, but if a highway route number is replaced, it is always with some long three digit number that has no reference to a parent highway.
As Steve Riner pointed out upthread (and I have pointed out in the past in MTR), the new three-digit number will typically have as its first digit the number of the NMDOT district. Each NMDOT district has a block of up to 100 route numbers which are available for assignment to state highways within that district which need renumbering. Numbers already assigned are withdrawn from the block and the remainder are assigned more or less in sequence as they are needed. Most allocations out of these blocks were made during the course of the 1988 renumbering and as a result, for example, new 1988 numbers start in the high mid-100's in District 1 (southwestern NM) and in the very low 600's in District 6 (northwestern NM).
NM 2001 (probably a reference to
2001: A Space Odyssey) and NM 6563 (Balmer transition!) are true outliers. NM 6563 was originally supposed to be NM 248 (since it is in District 2 and received its current number during the course of the 1988 renumbering).
In addition to the primary state highways in NM, the state-maintained frontage roads constitute a state secondary highway system with its own shield (NM state outline on black background). Frontage roads have four-digit numbers, with the first two digits being typically the route number of the freeway mainline (so, for example, US 70 in Las Cruces might have frontage roads numbered 7000 and above). Frontage roads are rarely explicitly signed with shields but there are some examples in the field, notably on I-10 in southwestern NM. It is my understanding that NM has had other routes numbered between 9990 and 9999 but this is based on six-year-old information and these routes may no longer exist if they were being used as temporary designations for lengths of state highway which NMDOT wanted to offload onto localities.
Quote from: mightyace on April 29, 2010, 05:01:18 AMI didn't know that. So, officially, US 101 and CA 1 have a gap in them?
SR 1 has multiple gaps in it, as do quite a few other state routes. All California state routes are defined in the Streets and Highways Code. You see quite a few definitions of the form: "Route X is from: (a) A to B; (b) C to D; (c) E to F; . . ." But Caltrans tends to sign routes across gaps in the route definition as if the route existed across the gap (SR 49/89 in the Sierras being one example), without using a "TO" tab. The reason for this is that until Caltrans adopted the FHWA manual with a supplement in 2004, the Caltrans Traffic Manual restricted the use of "TO" tabs to signing the way to a freeway. This restriction no longer exists but I am not personally aware of any field examples of "TO" being used otherwise than to lead to a freeway.
Quote from: SyntheticDreamer on April 28, 2010, 10:33:24 PM
The number appears to have been a coincidence, as froggie said.
VA 895 was numbered as such because the way it was planned and funded meant it could not become an interstate highway, at least for as long as it remains a toll road. Presumably if tolls are ever removed, it could become I-895, but Transurban has a 99-year lease on the highway, so assuming it doesn't lose that lease somehow, we'll be into the 2100s before I-895 becomes reality in Virginia.
VA 195 was numbered as an extension of I-195 and is maintained by the Richmond Metropolitan Authority (which now signs the beginning and end of its area of maintenance - it does this with VA 76, too).
VA 785 is a placeholder for I-785, should it ever come into being in Virginia. It isn't signed, although "Future I-785" is.
According to the VHP, back when dinosaurs ruled the earth, three-digit state highways in Virginia were usually spurs of two-digit routes (sometimes one-digit routes, which caused confusion), and seem to have been numbered in the order of their creation - the first spur of VA 30 was VA 301, the second was VA 302, etc. This could extend past 10 - the 10th spur of VA 10 was VA 1010, and there were also a VA 1011 and a VA 1012. A spur of a spur (the first VA 311, which is now part of VA 54) got numbered as VA 3111, one of the highest numbered primary routes ever to exist.
The only current rule seems to be that primary/U.S./interstate routes cannot duplicate secondary route numbers, even though this probably isn't even a rule at all - it's just hard for this to happen since the SR's start at 600. There is no SR 895 in Chesterfield County (Henrico has no SR's). There was not a SR 664 in Suffolk when Suffolk still officially had SR's, but there IS a SR 785 in Pittsylvania County, though I'm not sure VA 785 enters the county.
I just re-read what I wrote for the history of renumbering and I definitely need to re-write it. There are some inaccuracies in it.
To clarify a little, 3-digit routes as described above did not co-exist with single digit routes, which did not exist in Virginia 1923-33. Spurs off routes (1 or 2 digit) from 1918-23 were suffixes (W,X,Y,Z were used) or simply SPUR which on maps were shown as if they were the mainline route.
There were 5 explicitly known 4-digit routes 1923-28: 1010, 1011, 1012, 1141 and 3111. A 6th, 1013, was likely to have existed but I have not been able to prove it definitively.
VA 195 was a renumbering of VA 88 which occurred before any of it was opened.
I believe it -is- a rule that primary routes be numbered under 600. The basis for this is that the 2001 and 2003 route logs list all numbers that are in use and all numbers that are NOT (with NOT ASSIGNED). This list stops at 599. VA 895 is an anomaly/exception. It isn't the first time Virginia has violated its rules of numbering.
Suffolk SR 664 was renumbered as SR 759 (this is W. Liberty Spring Rd off US 13; Quaker Rd; Pineview Rd; Gates Rd in a loop southwest to the NC Line. Google Maps still shows the stub from Pittmantown Rd SR 668 to NC as SR 664 - http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=suffolk,+va&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=52.550571,90.175781&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Suffolk,+Virginia&ll=36.553155,-76.812801&spn=0.013152,0.022016&t=h&z=16 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=suffolk,+va&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=52.550571,90.175781&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Suffolk,+Virginia&ll=36.553155,-76.812801&spn=0.013152,0.022016&t=h&z=16)
I cannot find a Chesterfield SR 895 in the 1958 VDOT atlas and it does not show in the 2001 traffic log either.
While Henrico County has not ever had VDOT-maintained secondary roads, for years they had inventory numbers that mimicked the SR-numbering system. Official maps in the 50s-60s showed them and the 1958 Henrico County map shows all of them. There was no SR 895 in 1958 there either.
If VA 785 still ends at the US 29-58-360 interchange, the entire route is within the City of Danville.
Mapmikey
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 29, 2010, 06:44:09 AMNM 6563 (Balmer transition!)
I never realized that! :-D
now, what's Florida 9336?
Quote from: Bickendan on April 29, 2010, 04:20:31 AM
Case in point: The Golden Gate Bridge officially has no routes on it; US 101 and CA 1 are signed across it for motorist convenience.
about the one place where the ultimate goal of signed routes -
motorist convenience - is noted.
How many other states say "well, we can't sign this route because it's not part of the legislated network - never mind that the road is completely up to standard and it would make a lot of sense to give this number to this corridor"?
Case in point: further south in California, highway 39, with a gap in it. County N8 is the gap, and it is a perfectly good urban arterial, with the same quality as the ends of 39 that touch it at the north and south.
(Meanwhile, further north, highway 39 is still signed, but there's a large barricade across the road because of a landside ... that took place in the 1970s.)
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 29, 2010, 06:49:23 AM
Quote from: mightyace on April 29, 2010, 05:01:18 AMI didn't know that. So, officially, US 101 and CA 1 have a gap in them?
SR 1 has multiple gaps in it, as do quite a few other state routes. All California state routes are defined in the Streets and Highways Code. You see quite a few definitions of the form: "Route X is from: (a) A to B; (b) C to D; (c) E to F; . . ." But Caltrans tends to sign routes across gaps in the route definition as if the route existed across the gap (SR 49/89 in the Sierras being one example), without using a "TO" tab. The reason for this is that until Caltrans adopted the FHWA manual with a supplement in 2004, the Caltrans Traffic Manual restricted the use of "TO" tabs to signing the way to a freeway. This restriction no longer exists but I am not personally aware of any field examples of "TO" being used otherwise than to lead to a freeway.
There's one very notable example: "TO 99" on westbound US 50/Business 80 (and northbound Route 99) at the I-5 junction. (There is also a mix of "TO 99" and "99" signage southbound on I-5 from about J Street to US 50.) North of J Street, the route is somewhat more consistently signed as I-5/Route 99 - in the few instances Route 99 shields appear.
Quote from: agentsteel53about the one place where the ultimate goal of signed routes - motorist convenience - is noted.
How many other states say "well, we can't sign this route because it's not part of the legislated network - never mind that the road is completely up to standard and it would make a lot of sense to give this number to this corridor"?
Funny thing is, IIRC, Route 1/US 101 are not signed on the bridge itself - BUT are signed from the toll plaza south, and from the Marin landing north. Which still beats your example of the Route 39 gap...(amusing considering that Route 39 was proposed as a unified route through Fullerton in the 1930s, but that maintenance/signage gap has existed as far back as the 1940s!)
Other cases in which a co-routing/gap is not acknowledged via any signage:
Route 193
Route 16
Route 1 through Santa Barbara County
Route 271 north of Route 1
There are also many examples of existing corridors along unsigned/proposed routes that could be signed for motorist convenience, but aren't at all (i.e. Route 93, Route 77, Route 47 north of Route 91).
Because Oklahoma has never undergone a complete, system-wide renumbering, the current route system has organically evolved from the original August 1924 route system. You can find echoes of it if you know what to look for. SH-9 is the most extreme example: everything west of Chickasha that is SH-9 has always been SH-9, more or less. SH-14 was once a major border-to-border route, but US 183 stole its thunder, and now it's just an alternate way of getting from Waynoka to Alva.
Beyond glimpses of the 1924 system, there seems to be little rhyme or reason as to how route numbers are assigned. Above 167 or so, there are large gaps between the numbers. Partially this has to do with derivative numbering (325 after NM 325, 209 after the similar nearby 109, 266 after 66, etc), but some of the numbers make no damn sense at all. Short spurs and connectors are generally numbered with letter suffixes, somewhat like New York; SH-54A connects SH-54 to Corn, for instance. Except when they don't--there are plenty spur routes that don't bear a letter suffix, like SH-42 to Dill City and SH-96 to the middle of nowhere. And there's 251A, when there's never been a 251...
Quote from: Mapmikey on April 29, 2010, 07:47:27 AM
While Henrico County has not ever had VDOT-maintained secondary roads, for years they had inventory numbers that mimicked the SR-numbering system. Official maps in the 50s-60s showed them and the 1958 Henrico County map shows all of them. There was no SR 895 in 1958 there either.
I need to find the 1958 Henrico County map, then, I could use it for a project I've had in mind for a while...
Thanks for clearing all that up for me, though. :)
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 29, 2010, 06:49:23 AM
The reason for this is that until Caltrans adopted the FHWA manual with a supplement in 2004, the Caltrans Traffic Manual restricted the use of "TO" tabs to signing the way to a freeway. This restriction no longer exists but I am not personally aware of any field examples of "TO" being used otherwise than to lead to a freeway.
There are some "TO 178" trailblazers in Bakersfield that refer to the surface street between the freeway 178 and the 99 freeway. I do not recall seeing them more recently than about a year ago, so they must qualify under the new rule.
there was until the early 90s a "TO 49" somewhere in the Sierras that was notable for being a white spade. I have no idea where; I never saw it.
Quote from: corco on February 10, 2009, 01:03:07 AM
Washington runs on very strict system where two digit east-west state routes run south to north in two columns and two digit north-south run west to east in increasing intervals. Three digit routes use a branch numbering scheme, so routes off SR 27 are SR 27x. Routes off interstate 5 are SR 5xx, usually increasing south to north or west to east, routes off US-12 are 12x
I go back and forth on my feelings with Washington's system. I'm preferable to the Interstate scheme - 1xx, 2xx, etc, but I know you can't do that for the silly number of routes that start off of 5 or 90. I do like the odd quirk that 522, the roadway that basically connects I-5 to US 2, is "5 to 2". With some numbers, I haven't been able to find their origins yet - like 202. 20 is too far north, so it either continued north to 2 once upon a time or it's just a random occurance. If you defined the number as branching from the most major route at an endpoint, it should be 902, shoudn't it? Even if it was put into place when US 10 went through, it'd be 102 -- although something off of US 101 might have that number anyway (I don't recall off-hand).
Quote from: RustyK on April 29, 2010, 08:29:50 PM
although something off of US 101 might have that number anyway (I don't recall off-hand).
you are correct. 101's children start at 102 and go at least as high as 113 and I am sure quite farther.
I believe the renumbering was in 1964 and took into account the new interstates, as opposed to the older US routes, which is why US-10 and US-99 did not get any children: they all were assigned to I-90 and I-5. Even I-82 has some children, like 821, which is an old US-97 alignment.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 29, 2010, 08:26:23 PM
There are some "TO 178" trailblazers in Bakersfield that refer to the surface street between the freeway 178 and the 99 freeway. I do not recall seeing them more recently than about a year ago, so they must qualify under the new rule.
Isn't that surface street actually Route 178 (and not part of a gap)? In which case, "TO" isn't being used correctly here either.
I did recall another Sacramento example: "To I-80 West" along westbound US 50 around Stockton Boulevard. Of course, just like westbound I-80 being signed for "US 101" (as opposed to the correct "TO US 101") on its last few miles in SF, the latest signage for the through lanes of westbound US 50/Business 80 at I-5 is "I-80 West San Francisco," even though that route is not at all I-80 (still another 4 miles away from that spot).
In another thread, I recall mentioning that the signage for southbound 101 around the East Los Angeles Interchange fits the new rule, basically "US 101 TO I-5/I-10."
Quote from: TheStranger on April 30, 2010, 04:05:53 AM
Isn't that surface street actually Route 178 (and not part of a gap)? In which case, "TO" isn't being used correctly here either.
the signs are on a road that is not 178, while the surface street is signed correctly as 178. They are trailblazers in the truest sense of the word. The reason I say they point to the surface street and not the freeway, is because, heading west on this road (I forget which one, some arterial coming from Union St - old US99 - just south of 178) the trailblazers say "to west 178".
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 30, 2010, 10:58:30 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on April 30, 2010, 04:05:53 AM
Isn't that surface street actually Route 178 (and not part of a gap)? In which case, "TO" isn't being used correctly here either.
the signs are on a road that is not 178, while the surface street is signed correctly as 178. They are trailblazers in the truest sense of the word. The reason I say they point to the surface street and not the freeway, is because, heading west on this road (I forget which one, some arterial coming from Union St - old US99 - just south of 178) the trailblazers say "to west 178".
Thanks for the clarification. Just looking at a map, that would be 24th Street between old 99/current 204 (Golden State Avenue) and Route 178 at M Street, right?
Rich Carlson did most of the original leg work for this and deserves the credit for listing how Illinois routes are numbered.
http://n9jig.com/
Illinois started numbering routes in order as State Bond Issue (SBI) Routes in 1918. They were numbered from 1 to 46 in the first batch, and then from 47 to 185 in the second batch in 1924. Many of these original SBI Routes still carry their original number. The SBI Route numbers are still used, even when superseeded by an US route number i.e. US-20 is still known by IDOT as SBI Route 5. There are also other designations that generally aren't seen by the public. Here are some of them:
FAI - Federal Aid Interstate such as I-55 or I-80 are known as FAI-55 or FAI-80.
FAP - Federal Aid Primary. Usually used in the planning stages such as FAP-431 for what is now I-355, and FAP-432 for the proposed northern extension of IL-53.
FAS - Federal Aid Secondary. Similar to the FAP Routes.
HB - House Bill. Route authorized by a House Bill.
SB - Senate Bill. Likewise by the Senate.
OR - Other Route. Funded by a different mechanism.
There is not a numbering pattern, but some 3dil routes are bunched together. Then there's a few that simply sounded good such as IL-38 for what was US-30A. Sound it out and you'll see.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 29, 2010, 08:33:44 PM
Quote from: RustyK on April 29, 2010, 08:29:50 PM
although something off of US 101 might have that number anyway (I don't recall off-hand).
you are correct. 101's children start at 102 and go at least as high as 113 and I am sure quite farther.
I believe the renumbering was in 1964 and took into account the new interstates, as opposed to the older US routes, which is why US-10 and US-99 did not get any children: they all were assigned to I-90 and I-5. Even I-82 has some children, like 821, which is an old US-97 alignment.
Interesting. Why was 202 given that number, then? Did it originally get all the way up to US 2? I can't imagine how, unless it followed SR 9's alignment, or went up 522's alignment... Or does it somehow justify the number because it meets 203?
QuoteInteresting. Why was 202 given that number, then? Did it originally get all the way up to US 2? I can't imagine how, unless it followed SR 9's alignment, or went up 522's alignment... Or does it somehow justify the number because it meets 203?
202 used to follow the route of 522 up to Monroe, but that was switched sometime in the 70s to give the Monroe-Seattle corridor one number.
There are a few other oddities in Washington, like SR 92 and 96 are "3 digit" branches of SR 9, since "90X" is taken by I-90.
SR 121 doesn't connect at all to US-12, but used to before being truncated.
SR 193 was supposed to one day connect to US-195, but the road was never built.
Some routes off of US-97 consider 97 to be "SR 15" despite that never existing (so a 15X and a 97X are both US-97 child routes)
Same with US-395- considered to be "SR 29" despite that never existing (so 29X and 39X are both US-395)
On that note, SR 290 no longer connects to US-395.
SR 181 doesn't connect with SR 18 anymore, but it used to.
Because US-2 gets 20X routes, SR 20 gets saddled with 21X, and SR 21 doesn't have any child routes.
SRs 224 and 225 don't connect to SR 22 and never have
SRs 432 and 433 are remnant numbers and used to be 832 and 833, but for conveniences sake they didn't assign a more logical number when they changed them
Quoteyou are correct. 101's children start at 102 and go at least as high as 113 and I am sure quite farther.
All the way to 119- and since all the numbers have been used at some point between 100 and 119, SR 19 was commissioned as a child route of US-101 that doesn't fit the grid at all.
Wyoming has three separate systems for state numbering.
For most routes, these being the minor routes, the numbers are issued by county in alphabetical order so
Albany: 10-29 (highest route assigned is 14)
Big Horn: 30-49 (37)
Campbell: 50-69 (51, or 59 depending on if you consider that to be a minor route- which I would disagree with)
Carbon: 70-89 (78)
Converse: 90-109 (96)
Crook: 110-129 (113, or 116 if you consider that to be a minor route- which I would disagree with)
Fremont: 130-149 (139)
Goshen: 150-169 (161)
Hot Springs: 170-189 (175)
Johnson: 190-209 (196)
Laramie: 210-229 (225)
Lincoln: 230-249 (241)
Natrona: 250-269 (259)
Niobrara: 270-289 (273)
Park: 290-309 (296)
Platte: 310-329 (321)
Sheridan: 330-349 (345)
Sublette: 350-369 (354)
Sweetwater: 370-389 (377)
Teton: 390-409 (391)
Uinta: 410-429 (414)
Washakie: 430-449 (436)
Weston: 450-469 (451)
The other system involves a bunch of more important regional routes that have numbers that branch off of the US highways. These would include 89, 114, 116, 120, 130, 230, 387, 430, 487, 530, 585, 789.
Finally, there's a third system that seems random of non-US route branches of regional importance (except for 28 and 34, all connect to another state's state highway system). These would be 22. 24, 28, 34, 59, 92, 150.
For the routes in the non-county schemes, even numbers are always east-west and odds are always north-south, so highways like 120 that are predominately straight north-south receive an east-west designation. Routes with the county scheme rarely have directionals affixed. County-numbered routes rarely connect to primary routes in another state (several go into Montana but receive secondary designations in Montana)- the exceptions being 414 which turns into Utah 43 and 151 which turns into Nebraska 88. Wyoming 239 almost connects to Idaho 34, but not quite.
Several county-numbered routes dead end at the state line and are continue into the new state as county roads. 430 is the only primary route that does this, turning into a gravel county road at the Colorado state line.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 29, 2010, 08:33:44 PM
you are correct. 101's children start at 102 and go at least as high as 113 and I am sure quite farther.
There is a WA 100 which is also a child of 101.
QuoteI believe the renumbering was in 1964 and took into account the new interstates, as opposed to the older US routes, which is why US-10 and US-99 did not get any children: they all were assigned to I-90 and I-5. Even I-82 has some children, like 821, which is an old US-97 alignment.
I did like, in the older routes, that the US highways whose numbers were too big to fit the grid got surrogate WA route numbers for their offspring. Thus, the routes off US 97 were "15x" and those off 395 were "29x." More recent secondary routes use the actual number, so we now have 970 and 971 off 97, and 397 off 395.
Other goofiness: WA 131 off US 12, when 126 was available, the previously mentioned 19, and WA 92.
Quote from: corco on April 30, 2010, 01:35:38 PM
The other system involves a bunch of more important regional routes that have numbers that branch off of the US highways. These would include 89, 114, 116, 120, 130, 230, 387, 430, 487, 530, 585, 789.
do any of those correspond to former US routes? My guess is that 116 does, and maybe 530. 789 is the proposed US-789 corridor, and is 89 an old alignment of US-89?
Quote from: corco on April 30, 2010, 11:52:53 AM
All the way to 119- and since all the numbers have been used at some point between 100 and 119, SR 19 was commissioned as a child route of US-101 that doesn't fit the grid at all.
I presume the 12x'es are children of US-12? Are there any 13x'es?
Quote from: TheStranger on April 30, 2010, 11:16:46 AM
Thanks for the clarification. Just looking at a map, that would be 24th Street between old 99/current 204 (Golden State Avenue) and Route 178 at M Street, right?
That's gotta be it. Unfortunately Google Maps is loading extra-slow for me today so I cannot confirm. In Street View you should find the TO 178 WEST trailblazer immediately when you turn from old 99 (Union Blvd? Golden State Ave?) onto 24th westbound.
Quote
do any of those correspond to former US routes? My guess is that 116 does, and maybe 530. 789 is the proposed US-789 corridor, and is 89 an old alignment of US-89?
Wyoming 89 was a proposed alignment of US-89 that would have followed it and what is now I-80 to Salt Lake City. It was originally numbered 89 in an effort to try to get the route commissioned over that alignment, then switched to either 65 or 91, then somewhere along the line out of protest Wyoming switched the number back to 89 and (along with billboard owning local businesses) proudly advertises it as the fastest route to Salt Lake City
All of Wyoming 114 and US-14 Alternate from Lovell to Cody were once US-420.
Wyoming 116 was never US-116, but there as a US-116 that followed what is now US-14 from Ucross Junction up to Sheridan
Wyoming 120, 130, 230, 387, 430, 487, 530, 585 were never anything to my knowledge, although 387 is not the first route to bear that number.
Wyoming 220, which I forgot to mention earlier used to be part of US-87E, an old branch route of US-87 that went from Rawlins to Casper and then followed what is now regular US-87 all the way to Great Falls Montana where the routes rejoined.
So no direct correspondence.
Quote
I presume the 12x'es are children of US-12? Are there any 13x'es?
Yup- as Xonhulu said earlier and I forgot to mention as an oddity, SR 131 is a strangely numbered child of US-12, presumably because it was commissioned at the same time that SR 126 was decommissioned and they didn't want to cause confusion (despite the two routes being a couple hundred miles apart)
Quote from: corco on April 30, 2010, 09:39:03 PM
I presume the 12x'es are children of US-12? Are there any 13x'es?
Yup- as Xonhulu said earlier and I forgot to mention as an oddity, SR 131 is a strangely numbered child of US-12, presumably because it was commissioned at the same time that SR 126 was decommissioned and they didn't want to cause confusion (despite the two routes being a couple hundred miles apart)
[/quote]
Interesting stuff - thanks to you and Xonhulu.
I have read that Kansas has a state law prohibiting any state highway from falling entirely within incorporated areas. In such cases, KDOT is forced to decommission the highway (or extend it, I guess, but I don't know of that happening). Is anyone aware of what law, exactly, requires this?
The only law I can find regarding that is here
http://www.kslegislature.org/legsrv-statutes/getStatute.do?number=28284 (http://www.kslegislature.org/legsrv-statutes/getStatute.do?number=28284)
of which this would be the useful part
QuoteIn addition to highways of the state highway system, the secretary of transportation shall designate in those cities on such system certain streets as city connecting links. "City connecting link" means a routing inside the city limits of a city which: (1) Connects a state highway through a city; (2) connects a state highway to a city connecting link of another state highway; (3) is a state highway which terminates within such city; (4) connects a state highway with a road or highway under the jurisdiction of the Kansas turnpike authority; or (5) begins and ends within a city's limits and is designated as part of the national system of interstate and defense highways.
And that seems to contradict that notion.
Describing maintenance (from here (http://www.kslegislature.org/legsrv-statutes/getStatute.do?number=28303)and here (http://www.kslegislature.org/legsrv-statutes/getStatute.do?number=28295):
QuoteThe secretary of transportation annually shall apportion and distribute quarterly, on the first day of January, April, July and October, to cities on the state highway system from the state highway fund moneys at the rate of $3,000 per year per lane per mile for the maintenance of streets and highways in cities designated by the secretary as city connecting links. Unless a consolidated street and highway fund is established pursuant to K.S.A. 12-1,119, and amendments thereto, all moneys distributed by the secretary shall be credited to the street and alley funds of such cities. All moneys so distributed shall be used solely for the maintenance of city connecting links.
QuoteThe cost of construction, improvement and the reconstruction of such streets and highways, shall be apportioned between the department of transportation and such city, to be determined by an agreement between the city and the secretary of transportation. The portion of such cost to be paid by the secretary shall be paid from that portion of the state highway fund provided for construction of state highways and the cost of the remainder of such street highways shall be paid by the city from a fund raised in the manner provided by law for the payment for grading, curbing, guttering and paving streets in such city: Provided, That in no event shall the secretary of transportation be liable for construction, improvement or reconstruction as herein set out unless the secretary shall have designated such streets as connecting links in the state highway systems: And provided further, That the secretary of transportation shall decide the time when such construction, improvement or reconstruction shall be commenced.
The way I read all that is that technically all state highways end at city limits, but state maintenance of said highways can still exist and said routes can still be posted as state highways.
Off topic but also interesting- http://www.kslegislature.org/legsrv-statutes/getStatute.do?number=28316
QuoteWhenever the secretary of transportation or Kansas turnpike authority shall cause to be manufactured any sign or marker which indicates mileage or distance to destination points, such sign or marker shall be manufactured so that, in addition to the requirements imposed by K.S.A. 8-2003, such mileage or distance also shall be designated in accordance with the metric system. The provisions of this section shall apply only in the event a demonstration project concerning use of the metric system on highway signs or markers is approved by the United States department of transportation.
Quote from: bulldog1979 on April 27, 2010, 03:13:51 AM
Actually, as I understand it, Michigan "reserved" the single-digits for a superhighway system that later became the Interstates, and they started to re-assign the single-digits later. All of the numbers less than 10 have been in use at some time except M-2.
There was briefly an M-2 -- The M-2 alignment was around in the mid-70s along Schoolcraft Road west of Detroit as the I-96/Jeffries Freeway was being constructed. M-2 was decommissioned around the time that I-96 opened from the Southfield Freeway/M-39 to I-275 in the late 70's. What was then M-2 is now the I-96 "Service Drive" on either side of the freeway, still labeled as Schoolcraft Road.
I didn't see it mentioned in this thread, which is over a year old, but Wisconsin's original state highways were numbered in order of their length. The longest WI highway was WI-10 (current US-51 from IL to Hurley and US-2 from Hurley to MN), then WI-11, WI-12 (current US-12), etc.
Still, 2d WI highways are more "major" than 3ds, but there is no grid or any odd/even issues.